“What river separates China from India?” someone asked at a recent social event in Metro Vancouver.

Answer: “The Fraser River.”

No one laughed. It’s not that kind of a joke. It’s more a lesson in demographics. The Fraser River forms a clear boundary between north Surrey — with its concentrated enclave of South Asians — and Richmond, where the enclave is Chinese.

However, perhaps the real reason people did not chuckle was, as someone said: “That sounds racist.”

The remark reminded me of the difficulty people have understanding the word “racist.”

A lot of people, particularly liberals, do not seem to know the key Oxford Dictionary definition of racist, which is: “A person who believes that a particular race is superior to another.”

In other words, a racist is someone who calls a black soccer player a “monkey,” who believed Jews were inferior to Aryan Nazis and who endorsed the bloody ethnic cleansing that ripped through the former Yugoslavia. The Fraser River joke does not reflect such racial injustice.

But last week I again noted how this foundational meaning of racism has been lost. When someone suggested it is preferable for new immigrants to B.C. to speak English, a friend said the viewpoint had “racist undertones.”

He seemed unaware of studies showing new immigrants do, indeed, perform better economically and emotionally if they speak one of the languages of their new country. And the person who imagined white “racist undertones” also failed to realize that millions of people who live in India, the Philippines, Hong Kong and other major Canadian immigrant source countries speak decent English.

The confused use of the “racist” card has been effective in restricting public debate about immigration in Canada, where a trans-Atlantic poll showed we are much less likely than Europeans to follow news about immigration.

It’s no wonder precious few Canadians were willing to venture an opinion when former immigration minister Jason Kenney went out of his way on July 10th to portray environmentalist David Suzuki as a “xenophobe.” The Oxford defines “xenophobe” as a person with an “irrational fear and hatred of people from other countries.” Related terms are “racialist,” “colonialist,” “chauvinist,” “bigot,” “ethnocentrist” and “nativist.”

But Suzuki had simply maintained in an interview with a newspaper in France that Canada’s immigration policy is “crazy” because it brings in about 250,000 people a year mainly to stimulate economic growth while “plundering” southern countries’ talent pools.

Suzuki also recommended bringing more refugees to Canada in the interview. And he endorsed multiculturalism. Nowhere did Suzuki express contempt for anyone based on race or ethnicity (the latter being a more precise term).

Still, Kenney lambasted Suzuki — who has for years been giving the Conservatives trouble over their lax environmental standards — as not only “xenophobic,” but “toxic and irresponsible,” “out of touch” and “extreme(ly) anti-immigration.”

Although Simon Fraser University’s Mark Wexler believes Suzuki’s views were not carefully presented, the ethics professor said, “Kenney flirts with racism by using the term xenophobia. I think he is being politically motivated, opportunistic, machiavellian and toxic.”

The toxicity, however, is not merely in Kenney’s name-calling, Wexler said. “It’s in the way Kenney is taking a relatively obscure set of comments (by Suzuki) and blowing them not only out of proportion but to make his immigration policy look cutting edge. It is toxic to present oneself as virtuous merely by rhetorically condemning another for what at its worst is loose thinking.”

Suzuki has not offered a followup interview in Canada. No wonder. Fear of high-handed broadsides makes virtually all Canadians unwilling to raise their heads out of the trenches on immigration policy.

Canada is one of the few, if not only, countries in the world where no politician openly questions the rate of immigration, since all are dependent upon the votes of foreign-born residents.

That peculiar Canadian tendency to self-censor was captured by a columnist at the U.S.-based liberal website, The Huffington Post. J.J. McCullough said Kenney’s censoriousness revealed “the extraordinarily narrow realm of acceptable discourse on immigration in Canada.”

I must admit I found it odd to hear the “xenophobic” barbs coming from Kenney, who on July 18th was replaced by Chris Alexander as minister for immigration (I doubt the switch related to his dispute with Suzuki).

Last year Kenney made a point of telling a Vancouver Sun editorial board meeting it’s not racist to question whether high immigration was working for native-born or even new Canadians, who are increasingly ending up in poverty.

I appreciated how Kenney’s remarks echoed those of the late B.C. Lieutenant Governor David Lam, who said: “When a Canadian is concerned about his own way of living, this concern is not racism.”

Kenney was also one of the first I ever heard citing polls that show new immigrants are similar to other Canadians in their concern about immigration levels. A recent Forum Research poll found 70 per cent of Canadians support restricting the number of immigrants allowed in. And even a majority of Canadians born elsewhere — 58 per cent — agree curbs on immigration numbers are needed.

Still, despite the widespread doubts Kenney and other Canadians have about immigration policy, many continue to silence discussion by tossing out “racist” and related epithets.

They should heed Stanford law professor Richard Thompson Ford’s “primer on racism,” in which he examines ways the word is used and abused.

Thompson begins by stating there is some validity to the term, “institutional racism,” which describes such things as the unintentional injustices that can lead to a dearth of black coaches in American college football.

However, Thompson has less tolerance for “cultural racism,” in which an employer might avoid potential employees because they use ghetto slang or dress in gangster fashion. I’m aware some also claim “cultural racism” to denounce people’s dating preferences. But to me it doesn’t seem “culturally racist” for someone to prefer to date or marry a Chinese or black person over a Latino or white.

Thompson also questions the term “unconscious racism,” which psychologist Mahzarin Banaji coined after discovering subtle ways to smoke out racial bias among test subjects. However, Banaji herself is the first to clarify “unconscious racism” has no legal value and doesn’t prove anything about discrimination in real life.

The insightful Stanford law professor also has little time for “reverse racism,” which some people claim to attack affirmative action hiring policies. Thompson admits real reverse racism can occur, such as when Louis Farrakhan launches a diatribe against “white devils.”

Still, it’s worthwhile for Canadians to remember the Stanford law professor focuses on ethnic tensions in the U.S., which is rooted in legalized black slavery.

It’s a different story in Canada, which strives to overcome its treatment of aboriginals while welcoming people from all over the world. Yet, despite the high tolerance Canadians display for all kinds of immigrants, Canadians who raise concerns about “monster houses,” “passports of convenience” or foreign ownership can often be rejected as “racist.”

Andy Yan, a Vancouver planner, believes such name-calling is misguided, especially when it comes from white people in the real estate development industry. It shuts down genuine curiosity and a civil conversation about what is happening to the country.

As Yan says: “Whispers of racism should never be used to silence a desperately needed dialogue on the necessary actions to create a sustainable, livable, and just city.”

So where do we go from here with the word “racism?”

We can still reserve a spot for it and its synonyms — to capture those devastating times when ethnic injustice really does rear up.

But, every time we are tempted to casually lash out that someone is “racist,” it would be wise to take a deep breath. The word “racist” or “xenophobe” should be anything but a lazy form of one-upmanship.

Allegations such as “racist,” “xenophobe” and “nativist” open the accuser to counter-charges, particularly of bullying. There is moral danger to judging others harshly — especially by calling them things they might not be.

Indeed, when we label another person a “racist” we often think ourselves superior. Which is exactly what a racist does.

Comments

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.

Share

Douglas Todd: What is racism? Confusion reigns

Video

Entertainment Videos

Best of Postmedia

Be afraid. Be very afraid. Ignore the diversions in the United States: athletes kneeling or standing during the national anthem; Republicans flailing and failing again on health care; a kick-boxing creationist possibly becoming senator from Alabama. Calamity looms elsewhere. We are hurtling toward war with North Korea. It may be as early as next month. […]

It wasn’t in the middle of a farmer’s muddy field or deep in the boreal forest where the Canadian oilsands truly struck pay dirt. It was inside Fort McMurray’s recreation centre. More than 1,400 oilpatch workers, corporate executives, provincial leaders and the country’s prime minister assembled 21 years ago in northern Alberta to grasp a […]

Google’s powerful search engine is defeating some court-ordered publication bans in Canada and undermining efforts to protect young offenders and victims. Computer experts believe it’s an unintended, “mind-boggling” consequence of Google search algorithms. In six high-profile cases documented by the Citizen, searching the name of a young offender or victim online pointed to media coverage […]

Almost Done!

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.